This has been a point I’ve been trying t tackle in my life for a while now, and I’m hoping this sub can help out. I’d like to add a trigger warning for topics of sexual assault.
Often when I’m discussing social topics with people who don’t tend to agree with me the conversation will hit a point where the other person will present some fact that will go against what I have just said, but doesn’t necessarily counter the point I’m trying to argue. So often they just drop supposed “facts” as if that makes the matter ok. I’ll try to present some examples that will clarify what I mean.

Whenever I’m trying to discuss or spread awareness of sexual assault on campuses, it seems that someone will always come along and deny that it’s a problem. He will throw out articles claiming that the 1 in 5 stat is wrong or misleading, and that there really isn’t that much of a problem (as if we could know that for certain). My issue is that even if all these things are true, it doesn’t stop the underlying issue of women feeling unsafe at colleges. It only makes the issue worse if so many women are being given the impression that their potential rape is not a concern because it is statistically insignificant. The feelings are being dismissed by the “reality” of the situation and I can’t make myself see what that should be the case. Does empathy count for nothing in today’s world?

Speaking of feeling safe, I find these kinds of people are also dismissive of safe spaces for people of color or other minorities in university. I want to make the same assertion here; If people feel safer in these situations, why is it alright to ridicule them or try and take those spaces away? It isn’t harming anyone, and it’s making people feel better, which is helpful for their well being.

Another example is on International Womens Day a friend on Facebook made a post about how there is still a lot of work that needs to be done for women in todays society. The post mentioned that women still feel afraid to walk outside alone at night. Someone responded by saying that women are statistically much less likely to be assaulted at night than men.

What help is a comment like that? If I’m afraid to be out at night, and I have a 0% chance of being assaulted or raped, and I’m afraid of being out on a night where there is a 50% chance of those things happening and in that instance they don’t, my panicked walk home is the same miserable experience.

Now, I hope I have presented examples that have a clear connection. I’m obviously not arguing that there is no harm in a situation where someone feels like they will be ok if they put their hand on a heated stove element or something like that. I think it’s more for situations where and individuals perception is their reality. What benefit is there is trying to dismiss that by saying that “actual reality” isn’t how they see it? It’s like if someone said “I’m scared of the dark” and someone else said “Why? The dark can’t hurt you”. Even if the dark can’t hurt someone, you’re just disregarding their pain instead of, I don’t know, turing on the lights or something helpful and trivial.

I’m having such a hard time seeing the other side of this. Please change my view!

tl;dr feelings inform our reality, so “feels” are more important than a facts for situations that concern individuals.

I added the bold to some parts of this. This is an excellent examples of how women think that their feelings are correct when their feelings are practically the opposite of what actually happens in reality. This woman will defend against that being pointed out, by saying that “her feelings are about making a larger point”. Since she has the facts wrong in the first place, her “larger points” and feelings are also wrong by definition. Take when she said, “women are being given the impression that their potential rape is not a concern because it is statistically insignificant”. If something happening is statistically insignificant, then it is a waste of time to be concerned about it. It is like saying, people in Canada should all learn how to defend themselves against being trampled by an elephant even though the chance of that happening to anyone in Canada is effectively zero.

Frankly everyone was glad to see the back of Christie Koehler. She was batshit insane and permanently offended at everything.

When she and the rest of her blue-haired nose-pierced asshole feminists are gone, the tech industry will breathe a sigh of relief.

Christie Koehler was another “woman in tech” who never did anything technical and harassed anyone doing real work. Clearly, she was nothing but a blight on Mozilla so its no surprise Mozilla employees would feel this way about her. It’s a good thing for Mozilla employees that Christie Koehler quit on her own. It would have been impossible to get rid of her because any Mozilla employee pointing out her unprofessional and dangerous behavior or lack of actual work would have have gotten fired just like Chris Beard is threatening to do if he finds out who aoiyama is.

This also means that any woman can get a paycheck now from Mozilla without doing any actual work. Any Mozilla employee who points out a woman’s lack of willingness to do work will be declared guilty of “hate speech” and fired.

I say we help out aoiyama and other Mozilla employees who are unable to speak up. What we should do is post comments to Reddit and other websites saying that we work for Mozilla and include some comment that will set off Mozilla upper management. (This is why I made the title of this post, “I Work For Mozilla And I’m A Misogynist”.) Either Mozilla will be forced to drop the witch hunt against aoiyama (and anyone else who agrees with him) due to a flood of garbage data, or Mozilla will turn into a gulag reminiscent of the Soviet Union under Stalin. Either way we will have shown how evil feminism in technology is.

So what will happen if women take over craft beer? Just like how women taking over tech would destroy innovation and the culture of startups in the tech industry, women taking over the craft beer industry would lead to small breweries being destroyed leaving a few large companies brewing piss water like Feminista and slapping a beer label on it. This is why we should all support the craft beer industry, assuming you care about fighting feminists and preserving high quality beer. I do so I’m going to be drinking some craft beer tonight.

Men’s Rights Edmonton in Canada has done some great work for mens (human) rights recently. The Vancouver Police Department came up with these anti-male posters that accuse all men of wanting to sexually assault women with the tag line, “Don’t Be That Guy”. MR-E turned the tables on them with a series of posters called, “Don’t Be That Girl” which were posted all over Edmonton, Canada. Here’s an example:

Needless to say, MR-E’s campaign has generated some reactions such as this woman who wants you report the posters to the government:

“I need men’s rights because any woman to whom I were faithfully married could abuse me, cheat on me, file for no-fault divorce, win the house, keep the children by making false allegations and spend the child support on designer shoes and phones while the judge shrugged, the politicians cheered and the media called me a deadbeat dad.”

Sometimes, there is no question who should win this award. This is one of those months. I have decided that this months winner is Shidea N. Lane. She is the woman who started a fight with Cleveland bus driver, Artis Hughes, after she demanded to ride the bus for free and verbally abused Hughes. There were youtube videos of what happened between Lane and Hughes, but they were removed from youtube for excessive violence. Hughes was suspended by his employer, the Cleveland RTA, pending an investigation. Lane has since tried to paint herself as a victim taking no responsibility for instigating the conflict between her and Hughes or endangering the safety of her fellow bus passengers. This callous disregard for anyone else has earned Shidea N. Lane the October 2012 Entitlement Princess Of The Month award.

Whenever a politician is supportive of mens rights, even just a little bit, we should support that politician. Gary Johnson, the former Republican governor of New Mexico is one such politician. He is running on the Libertarian party ticket with Judge Jim Gray as his running mate. Gov. Johnson is the only presidential candidate this year (including those candidates who didn’t make it past the primaries) to come out in support of any aspect of mens rights. Here is a video of Gov. Johnson talking to Fathers and Families about fathers rights issues:

Gov. Johnson gets it when it comes to fathers rights. In the video he doesn’t talk about other aspects of mens rights, but even if he is unaware of them, Gov. Johnson is likely to understand the issues and support mens rights. For president this year I am going to be voting for the Johnson/Gray ticket. Even though he has only talked about fathers rights, that puts him far ahead of anyone else running for president.

For what it’s worth (and it isn’t worth that much), I am endorsing Gov. Johnson for President of the U.S.

For anyone who cares about mens rights, voting can be problematic. For a particular office the choices are often a feminist vs. a conservative female supremacist who is anti-feminist in name only. As a result it is understandable that many MRAs would decide that voting is pointless. However, for MRAs in the U.S. should vote this November for two reasons.

The first reason is that judges at the state level are often elected unlike federal judges who are appointed. As was said by Dean Esmay at A Voice For Men, anti-family courts operate at the state level, and the courts that falsely imprison men for rape, abuse, or other crimes at state courts. This means it is possible (depending on the state) to vote misandrist judges out of office. Even if judges in a particular state aren’t elected, your vote for state offices can have a greater impact than your vote at the federal level. In addition, in many states district attorneys and prosecutors are elected as well. This provides the opportunity for MRAs to vote out misandrist prosecutors. This will need to be a strategy used across multiple election cycles to make it work so the best thing is to get started in November’s election. (A good place to start is with the information that Dean Esmay provided at A Voice For Men.)

The second reason to vote this November is to put a stop to the “war on women” myth. As liberal politicians have become more dependent on the women’s vote, their pandering to women has reached a fever pitch with the myth of the “war on women”. The only way to put a stop to this level of pandering to women is by voting against any and all politicians who say there is a “war on women”. Vote for a conservative politician or a third party politician. If there are no candidates for a particular office other than a politician invoking the mythical “war on women”, then write in “the war on women is a myth”. It doesn’t matter which one you pick, as long as you register a vote that is not for a politician who says there is a “war on women”. This will also need to be a strategy used across multiple election cycles so again it is best to start by voting this November.

If MRAs vote this November for these two reasons (and continue to vote with the same goals over the next several elections), then this strategy can have a real impact to roll back feminism and help men who would otherwise be in the cross hairs of feminist policies.

Over the past two years A Voice for Men has evolved into an ever more sophisticated instrument for activism on behalf of men and boys. Most of our work has focused on changing the public dialogue in matters of sexual politics; to in effect end the hegemony over the narrative long enjoyed by feminist ideologues. While we are not hanging out a “Mission Accomplished” banner, it is fair to say we have made visible headway in moving toward that goal.

They know we are here and they know we are not going to shut up. That is why you see feminists increasingly panicked about our presence and about our growth, and why they are awkwardly scrambling to bring an end to it.

The work we are doing to inject balance into the social discourse has also had another effect: Activism on the ground. Anyone following this site, or even taking a stroll down certain streets in cities like Vancouver, and others, is taking notice that a long awaited rebuttal to cultural misandry is finding its legs.

It is only a matter of time before those legs will be sprinting.

In that spirit, I am proud to inform members of the MRM that we are taking activism to yet another level. Our recent, promising returns from publicly intervening in the corruption of a misandric criminal justice apparatus has given birth to the idea that this type of activism should be the centerpiece of what AVoice for Men does. We have reorganized accordingly.

The Judicial Accountability Committee, henceforth referred to as JAC, or, The Committee, has been assembled to make this type of activism the predominant mainstay of AVfMs efforts to effect change where it is needed most.

The six member panel is co-chaired by Dr. Tara Palmatier and myself, and also includes AVfM editors James Huff, Dean Esmay, John the Other and AVfM News Director Robert O’Hara.

The purpose of The Committee is to identify, screen, fact check and organize highly assertive activism in cases that typify the pervasive problems of corruption and misandry in our criminal and family courts. We will not just be targeting the larger problem of that corruption and misandry, but the individual government functionaries responsible for it happening.

Our courts, when operating according to the intention of their design, serve the dual purpose of securing justice for victims while protecting the rights of the accused. They are the arena of power where all of our constitutional rights, as well as our sense of public safety, hang in the balance.

As is evidenced repeatedly though the pages of this website, much of the responsibility those courts have to the people has been swallowed up in a sea of politics, ambition, corruption and hubris, resulting in abuses that have become the rule, rather than the exception.

Meanwhile, our only other avenue to checks and balances is a mainstream media that has devolved into a useless cesspool of commercial interests with no inclination rock the boat by covering what is happening.

It is the objective of The Committee to prod that coverage from the media, and where it cannot be prodded, to replace it. Either way, the silence in the face of what is happening must come to an end.

Currently, The Committee has taken on the case of Lt. Col Joel Kirk, a US Air Force fighter pilot whose children have been placed into the hands of a documented child abuser by order of family court Judge Lori B. Jackson in Harrison County, West Virginia.

In this and in all future cases, The Committee will be bringing all of AVfM’s resources to bear in efforts to bring as much public pressure, embarrassment, negative press and legal consequences to the person or persons responsible for the abuses.

This is also our opportunity to announce that men’s activists can help us make this initiative more successful. By signing on as a committee affiliate, you give your pledge to join all the cases set forth in the future by the committee. That means a simple but firm obligation to join us in “minimum action” by making contact with each cases media and government agencies via email and phone (where possible). Each affiliate will blind carbon their emails to The Committee and notify us as to what phone calls you made and to whom.

Please do not sign on as an affiliate unless you plan on following through 100%. We must know the numbers of people we can count on to take actions in conjunction with each effort.

You will also be placed on a private mailing list and be apprised of current committee strategy (within reason) and advised or progress before it makes it to the site or radio programs.

If you have ever wanted to be part of an organized effort to advocate for men and boys in an area where it is desperately needed, this is your chance. The work is simple, and not particularly time consuming for affiliates, but again, I stress, this is not for armchair quarterbacks. Team players only, please.

You can add your name to the list of the committed and be placed on the mailing list by sending an email to thecommittee@avoiceformen.com.

This sounds like a great way to support mens rights. Go join and make a real difference.

For those of you who don’t know how Kickstarter works, they seek crowdsourced donations to fund projects (a documentary, in this case). If the amount requested is not raised, all donations are returned.

About $9000 more is needed, and just 8 days remaining.

If you were wondering about new ways to have an impact, this is where you can. If MRAs can’t scrape up the mere $9000 needed to reach the funding threshold, that is a total failure of the MRM, and of the entire androsphere.

Five people have donated $1000 or more (and there is a good chance none of them are MRAs), but even donations of $5 or $10 can be accepted.

Come on! You can do it!

I fear that this is a time where the absence of Ferdinand Bardamu will be strongly felt…..

Go and donate. Do something for mens rights. Fight the false rape industry.